|
Post by Dick Tracy on Nov 12, 2015 14:43:36 GMT -5
Posted on CHUG:
Board_Report Date: 11/12/2015 Seq: 2
AGENDA
Board of Directors Meeting
S-bag Lake Owners Association, Inc.
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
9:00 am, SLR Clubhouse
Call to Order
Invocation
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call
Approve minutes from October 14, 2015, Board Meeting
Approve Agenda
Chap Click -- Manager's Report
Clf Jnsn -- President's Report
Jade Rite -- Vice President's Report
Tummy Blkbrn -- Secretary
· Board Correspondence
Stv Suthrd -- Treasurer's Report
· September financials
· 2016-2017 Budget update
leery listerine
· TOPS Condo/HOA software demonstration update
Chrls Schlz
· Revitalization
Old Business
· Phone service at SLR office -- Grdn Hrthrn, Technology Committee
New Business
· Annual election for budget approval and three directors
· Shuffleboard courts
Adjourn
Owner Comments
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Nov 12, 2015 14:49:27 GMT -5
Noted: The Sale/Lease Agreement between KCNet/SLR is not on the Agenda. ?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 18, 2015 11:43:53 GMT -5
It was a real Whoop-D-Doo! Owners were loaded for bear!
I will post the summary a little later, along with the audio. It was a two hour meeting and this time I remembered to index the segments.
FoolDay was in his usual ugly mood and, as usual, launched his daggers towards the "girls" demanding to know how much the lawsuits cost SLohA) and D Brnd made a special guest appearance to call Jm Ath a liar (he said he didn't resign from the Board because of conflict of interest with KCNet but offered no reason.)
The audience heckled speakers and was enormously hostile toward the board, at times. The board really took it on the chin this morning, but this animosity has been building for a LONG time! No amount of childish behavior at meetings shocks me anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 18, 2015 12:09:42 GMT -5
Oh I almost forgot. The assessments are going UP! The proposal is for $525/Q and the proposed budget was ratified to be brought to the owners in Feb 2016. The proposed budget should be available in the office, according to a question asked of the board, immediately.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 18, 2015 15:42:05 GMT -5
BOD Meeting Summary and Index--Index Times are approximate. Here is the link to the meeting audio: BOD Meeting Audio Meeting is nearly 2 hours long. Owners Comments are on separate post and consumed 45 minutes. 11/21 The audio link was not working for some reason; it has been reloaded and tested and is working now. The beginning audio is low but gets better. If you want the actual audio file, email me @ movinsue@gmail.com. It is BEST to listen to the audio from your own computer through earbuds! Attachment Deleted The meeting opened with the Manager Report and the first thing discussed was the North Recreation Wall which needs to be repaired or replaced. The bids were "all over the place" from $2500-$28,000 for repair or replacement. The underlying question was "What was behind the Wall?" I was reminded of the graphic on the Pink Floyd album named "The Wall" which seemed particularly appropriate as I was readying this summary. The board took a pounding this morning and I imagined that they might have looked like this afterward... Motion passed to give job to cupstain for $2500-10,725. Index 8:30 An audience member asked a question of the board and the board answered the first question about the work being "guaranteed" (answer yes) but cut off the speaker who had a followup question about the bids. The board does not want to hear the owners speak during the meeting. The owner then commented was that "this was the problem with the board; it didn't include the owners"... 9:25 Curbing has been ruined by the weather and must be done over. Estimate $3670. Discussion: Jhn could do it for about $400 in supplies. No motion. 11:28 CH Lift Station #2 Pump--ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST! Bids from $4K TO 7K for new pump-- another new pump? Motion passed to accept Stwd $4K 13:60 Motion passed to terminate Fox Hollow Landscaping contract; must give 30 days notice. No discussion. (Another item of business discussed in secret by "less than a Board quorum, of course".) END of Manager Report 15:25 Pres Report Mostly self-deprecating comments about how Board is "only human" and imperfect and their job is not to be negotiating with owners about a problem and they would be working to correct that and keep the board speaking with ONE VOICE! (Where have we heard that before?) Gave a confession: didn't know that you don't have to read a motion twice. (Someone is not studying Robber's Rules for Dummies!) 20:41 V Pres Report Comments about not being a quitter but personal situation such that too many distractions to business. Thanked people for support 22:01 Secretary Report: One correspondence complaining about board not allowing audience participation; why attend meeting when all you can do is watch? No input, no vote or voice. Board comments: Blkbrn implored board to reevaluate audience interaction and focus on setting up parameters much like Polk County did during Brnd/stab's tower hearings. Board should be more open to comments on issues of importance to owners (like beyond music at the pool?) Suthrd spoke against allowing off-agenda comments. listerine lamented the difficulty of following the law which prevents the board from meeting as a quorum except with notice to members and open meetings. Blingz is just glad his time on the board is up in Feb and stated he will not run for another term. Toneesha said she will have some ideas to present about this issue for the next meeting. 36:26 Treasurer Report: (Wait for it.....!) "We are in very good shape!" All line items underbudget except Contract Services. Treasurer offered no reason for the overage. Said FULL AND HIGHLIGHT Sept Financials are on CHUG and in the office. (No --FULL Financials are not on CHUG-only abbreviated "highlights" are on CHUG. FULL Financials are posted on this Forum or can be obtained at the office. Motioned Board to ratify proposed budget for next fiscal year. Assessment raised to $525/Q. Breakdown $457 to Operating, $8 to SBA and $60 to Water (No inscrutable water increase this year!) The SBA loan can be retired in 2016 with the lower amount of $8/Q. Our Treasurer said the increase was 3% over last year. (Let us all pause for a moment of silence for our Treasurer. We have been paying $25/Q for SBA loan and now the payoff of the loan only requires $8/Q. That leaves owners with a breathing space of $17/Q for each quarter. OR DOES IT? It does not. That $17/Q "SBA savings" has been shifted to the general assessment collection which--last year was $425 and the proposed amount is $457. This is a 7 1/2 % increase--not 3%... Tsk Tsk Mr. Treasurer!
40:22 Motion passed to ratify the budget to be presented to owners. Budget meeting is Dec 9th at 9am.
41:59 leery listerine reporting on TOPS new software meeting was a self-described "disaster" and one which many owners felt was a "move in the wrong direction". The new website will be $59.95/mo plus $150 set up + $70 to lease domain for 2 years. stab will maintain CHUG as a temporary backup until Board and its helpers get up to speed. Motion passed.
51:45 Sm all No report Schlz said Organizing Committee would be preparing for a Dec-Jan mailing.
53:00 Phone Service; report given by Committee to replace Verizon in office currently costing $400/mo with Kay c Net VOIP at $60/mo, retain one backup Verizon line for "emergencies" and fax; use your own purchased equipment. This does not deal with the Maintenance phone lines which can probably use the same VOIP lines. 57:36 Motion passed to buy phones around $800 to get it going and $60/mo thereafter.
59:33 Clf Jnsn is resurrecting "Old Business" AKA "Kick the Can Down the Road" AKA "Let the new Board deal with it" AKA "Maybe if we don't talk about it, it will go away". In the past, New Business that was tabled was just forgotten about until the underlying issue comes up again.
First, lighting in Clubhouse parking lot. (FINALLY! This issue in the past was ineffectively dealt with by the board member and got bogged down with the park wanting pretty more than "safe".) One light will be installed in CH parking near post office. It was admitted that this was a piecemeal approach. The money will be donated by Women's Club. There was discussion about the tree which blocks available light and would it need to be removed or continually trimmed. It was decided to sort the tree thing out later and it was not included in the motion, which passed.
1:08 Election Feb 20th. Need candidates. (Still no announcement of who is retiring their term; but it is Blingz, murksberry and Suthrd).
1:09 Shuffleboard courts--deteriorated from age, cracks and drainage problems. The money is "not there" to replace. It won't be there for years. Best you can do is fix well enough to be playable. The money is not there because SLohA spent A TON more money on tennis courts than anticipated, has had HUGE insurance premium increases and increase in trash collection.
1:13 2nd yard sale. No interest by Clubs; Board says it is not a board matter let the Clubs decide. Doesn't seem to be much excitement for a 2nd community garage sale.
1:14 Music at the Pool/Earbuds. Not a burning issue after all. NOBODY contacted Blkbrn with an opinion. Other groups polled and people liked the music. Board wisely decided to not try to micromanage everything and declined to set a policy.
1:18 Meeting Adjourned. Continuation of OWNERS COMMENTS on next post. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by Lra on Nov 18, 2015 16:37:59 GMT -5
Mr. FoolDay and Mr. Suthrd, Your misguided points at today's SLohA Board meeting are an affront to all Saddlebaggers. You should be ashamed of yourselves. First, Mr. Suthrd, the insurance company paid Gngr and myself $1,280.00. The insurance company also paid for the mediation and all of the court fees and our lawyer fees. WE, SLohA members paid directly approximately $65,000. out of legal fees in our budget to GaGaKnees, Brown, et. al. for legal fees including the misguided attempt to Revitalize using an illegal ballot. All said and done, the Board pressed ahead with its own personal agenda demanding that an illegal and unwinnable lawsuit be filed against us and turning neighbor against neighbor. The true cost between SLohA funds and the insurance monies is at least $125,000. Now on to Mr. FoolDay 's inappropriate use of the following:..."how much did they cost us?" Stop splitting the community with your we/they or them/us Sm all minded attitude. SLohA is too special to bullied by "my high school team is better than your high school team" mentality. Your own pettiness defiles this community. Get over yourself.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 18, 2015 17:51:09 GMT -5
Lra posted:
This is all true and how do I know?
I WAS THERE and witnessed the self-centered behavior of the Board first hand and also the perspectives of my attorney on board member 'tude for over 2 years!
FoolDay--ALL my money was returned to me PLUS the insurance company paid an additional upcharge fee to my attorney PLUS they paid $5K to file the amendment contest. Plus, we had a fine lunch as the guest of the insurance company at mediation. What Suthrd, our competent and honest Treasurer failed to tell you was that the insurance company "covered" the costs of MY LAWSUIT and the Silversides COUNTERSUIT--which was the defense raised in the FIRST STRIKE LAWSUIT-- launched BY the Board brought against Astn/Tmyk. Just look at the Legal Fees Line item from Feb 2014 to March 2015 and add up the numbers. THAT is the true cost to the owners for the Board's actions.
It's a front end-back-end deal--the insurance paid it on the front end and SLohA is getting it now in the back end with insurance increases and exclusions. It's not the board's money! The Board picked these fights. The cost of filing the lawsuit against Silversides was over $68K--that is $$$$ in GaGaKnees et al's coffers win or lose. The Management Company's employee's affidavit was instrumental in deciding to S u e. The Affidavit was a lie and this caused SLohA's case to go south (even more). In my opinion, we need to send packin' for sending us the first psychopathic liar and now another greenhorn (Chap) and retain an independent attorney who is unconnected with Stmbug Ixx's interests.
Now, SLohA is on the hook for HUGE insurance premiums and exclusions of coverage. Owners will have to cough up the first $75K of any future lawsuit before the insurance will kick in. Thank your board esp Jnsn and Brnd. This expense will probably never go away--especially if there are any more lawsuits.
The Board was told it could not win Tg/Tmyk/Astn by EVERYONE but their egos were on the line and they persisted and spent --all told-- upwards of $100K of owner money on legal costs. In the end, what happened could have been predicted i.e. no one wants to insure SLohA against any lawsuit because now they are aware of the propensity of SLohA to be sued for wrongdoing. SLohA has a horrible track record dating back into the 80's because they have yet to observe the existence of law outside our gate.
I now have all that refunded money safely stashed should any future FOOLS try to trample my rights. This could have cost SLohA virtually nothing. They could have removed the Preservation from my lot-cost $10.00. I did everything humanly possible to avoid filing suit but the board chose to listen to the Management Company's advice on the covenants expiration being a "gray area". After spending thousands of dollars and 2 years of nasty, they belatedly admitted that it is a black 'n white area and are now attempting to spend even more money on a 2nd revitalization attempt that will likely fail due to absence of statutory standing. They were told PRIOR to the first attempt that the Ballots were illegal. They were advised in writing. They forged ahead anyway. With this bunch, it is all about showing a strong facade and winning and showing the community that troublemakers could be managed by an aggressive attack. Everyone can thank Jnsn and Brnd for engineering this strategy. The egos get stroked and the attorneys get paid no matter how the suit turns out.
This board violated my civil rights and dared me to S u e. Don't dare me again Board. I WILL S u e SLohA again and it will be much easier the second time around--and even more expensive.
FoolDay, why not give it a rest? Even the Klappers think you're nuts.
|
|
|
Post by pestcontrol on Nov 19, 2015 7:40:33 GMT -5
Two questions: 1) How much is Revitalization going to cost SLohA? 2) If as our treasurer says we are well under budget, why are the fees going up? Oh, a third question: Did we pay Brown, GaGaKnees, etc. last year to work on the Revitalization and if so, will they give SLohA courtesy hours for their flubbed job this year?
|
|
|
Post by Alaska HEMI R/T Jm Admin. on Nov 19, 2015 8:40:23 GMT -5
Oh I almost forgot. The assessments are going UP! The proposal is for $525/Q and the proposed budget was ratified to be brought to the owners in Feb 2016. The proposed budget should be available in the office, according to a question asked of the board, immediately. Anyone with a brain will VOTE NO on any future increases, the board and the management company just want more money to WASTE.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 19, 2015 9:27:23 GMT -5
pestcontrol posted: 1- One must look to the past costs and here's how it drills down: Feb Admin Costs 8104.00 This is likely to be largely mailing costs of very large revite packages to Canada and US and caused the OVER budget condition of $6271, hot dogs and stickers with "I Heart SLR" Feb Salary $?? Several office employees worked over a weekend prepping the packages. Probably on overtime. Feb Ridge Printing 4139.20 This is clearly annotated "revitalization supplies" on the check register Feb Legal 7350.00 Without invoice, it is unknown exact service but it is likely to be all revitalization due to timing. Remember that 3 attorneys attended the Revite Dog 'n Pony Show and likely billed SLohA 3 hours each + T & T plus lunch. March Legal $14,729.33 Annotated "general representation" but without invoice, it is unknown what part of that is attributable to revitalization and lawsuit mediation. So, the answer is--for starters--19,593.20 and possibly as high as $34,322.53 My guess is that about half of the $19K is mediation costs (12 hours times 3 attorneys= $9000) and would put the estimated cost of revitalization around $25K. I'm sure if someone would submit an official records request that the would assist in identifying the expenses associated with revitalization. 2- This is a great question to ask of the Board as it defies logic unless there are some new expenses anticipated next year. One needs to look at the proposed budget, which is available at the office now and I will post it under BUDGET AND RESERVES. I have one and it shows additional expenses: ... is giving itself another Sm all raise ...Legal Fees are projected to DECREASE by $20K (Really? Based on...?) ...Insurance premiums have INCREASED by around $35K (thank you Board!) ..property taxes have DECREASED by $2K ...Contingency Fund is still be funded to $15K despite having spent only $1200 (Why are owners being assessed for a fund which has no operating purpose other than slush?) ...UNCOLLECTABLE Assessments is being funded at DOUBLE last year from $5000 to $10000. The amount actually charged to Uncollectable Assessments this year is $26. (Why are owners funding DOUBLE this year over last when there has been nothing to collect?) ...Grounds Parts/Signs is being DECREASED by $11K from last year but is still funded way high. The amount projected to be spent for this fiscal year is under $9K so why are owners funding $25K? ...Water and Sewer OPERATING Costs ie parts, supplies, contracts (Not Reserves): is unchanged and being funded at $57,800 but has already spent $41,381 and that is projected to double. SLohA is only at the halfway mark of the fiscal year. ...Allocation for liens/foreclosures is increasing to 8K (from 5K) despite the fact that ZERO funds were expended because SLohA has NO LIEN/FORECLOSURE authority and will have none next year (Why are owners being asked to fund an illegal activity?) ...Pool/Jacuzzi: Projected to spend $23, 401 this year. Budget was $18K and is proposed is unchanged. There must be an explanation for being $5K+ over budget this year but not expected to be over budget next year. Maintenance: Misc I HATE to see Misc and Contingency or Sunbank credit card charges when it comes to a budget--the costs are not easily traceable from the check register. There are very few expenses that are so strange that they don't have a rational line item home. What is going on with this? It was budgeted at $18K and is projected to spend $33,021 this fiscal year. The proposed is $22K! What was ORIGINALLY "assigned" to this $18K? C'mon , when you get costs that high, they should be broken out into relevant and meaningful line items. Trash: INCREASED from $55K to $85K. That is a contract service and supposedly a fixed cost, but TT trashed SLohA's contract with them mid-contract and they are the cheapest service around. Contract Services-Sewer: Spending projected to be $42,850 this fiscal year but only budgeting $30K next year--why? Garden Upkeep: Budgeted last year at $10,200 but since Fox Hollow was terminated, it is not a funded category. I believe I recall the Board saying that Maintenance would have to do it since they terminated Fox Hollow Landscaping and there is no Garden Club. SBA Loan: Will be paid off this year with only $8/Q collected. This was a DEDICATED specific and directed expense and owners should be given the relief that payoff of the loan provides; ie $17Q. Instead Management Company and the board has shifted YOUR funds to the General Operating/Reserve Fund and will continue to spend owner money without cost controls and continue to fund KCNet's operations. The actual increase in the Operating Budget to owners is 7 1/2 % from $425 - 457. It is NOT 3% as our Treasurer would like us to believe by massaging the numbers $525/510. Shame on you Treasurer. I have a LOT of questions for the Board at the Budget Forum before I voted Yes to this budget. Buildings: DECREASED by half! From $30K to $15K. Why are we spending so much less than budgeted? What expenses were originally allocated to that Line Item? RESERVES: Allocation to Buildings DECREASED slightly, ROADS same, WATER & SEWAGE DOUBLED, RECREATION same, MISC cut in half (What is this fund for? Towers?) and Due to Reserves UNFUNDED. SLohA did not pay any loan back to Reserves in 2015 and appears it has no intention of paying back Reserves in 2016. SLohA borrowed $18K from Reserves and moved it to Operating and MUST pay it back, but it looks like SLohA will not meet its obligation. As for the third question...HAHAHAHAH!
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 19, 2015 19:32:33 GMT -5
Part II Owner's Comments (AFTER meeting adjournment, of course) This is not a strict transcription, but it is a very close one/
Owner 1: Why is the fountain down again put new bearings and Elctc what is Stwd doing? Chap: the pump has been taken apart and tested extensively in and out of the water and tested at the shop and fails intermittently and that cause of failure has not yet been identified but it has been verified by the vendor who was told not to bring it back until it worked. They don't want to come to you with another answer and tell you it's working when it's not.
Owner 2: I understand the new budget is for 2017-2018 and that the SBA loan will be paid off in 2016. If that is the case, then the budget increase and assessments is $40. Am I right or wrong! Toneesha: The budget is 2016-2017
Owner 3: We were discussing lighting in the parking lot and discussion of that issue started when we had an accident out in the parking lot which resulted in a fatality. Somebody from the insurance company who I went out with did a tour of the parking lot. At that time, the insurance company was insisting that we put in new lighting in but I don't know if we have the same insurance company or if that got dropped. The lighting was on this side of the parking lot where the accident happened --that's where they wanted the lighting... No comment from Board
Owner 4: Back on the comments from Jry Sln about having comments from the floor and being interactive a little bit--I'd like some of the old ways. Since we changed that, the impression that I got was people made comments out here after the meeting and the board turned itself off and never reacted to anybodies statement out here and like they turn themselves off. So I liked it before when comments were made and if the board could answer something, they did. Also if we could get Stv's (Suthrd's) article for the board to read and put on the Internet and maybe on CHUG and that would be nice so we could all see it and not just the board. Also the proposed budget could go on the website as well and since you've already passed it we should be able to get a copy at the office I assume. No comment from Board
Owner 5: I had several issues to address but I won't take the time to get to them all. I would suggest to the board that-legally-you probably already allow audience participation by the allowance of clapping--the allowance of the booing--by allowance of voices of affirmation. So I'm just asking that you consider that as a board when you consider opening up questions and involvement by other parties. Because I think it's important that you have input and I don't think you're getting that right now.
A major issue is wheelchair accessibility in the park. I know that you've gone to an extent to try to make most things accessible but I think the people that are doing that are not in wheelchairs and don't know what's accessible and what's not. They just do it by what they think. I would submit to you that you have three board vacancies coming up. I can't even get there up there on the St age, so that is something I would ask you to consider that you make that St age accessible. Other areas, and I won't be able to cover them all, but the pool when Marilyn was manager (I believe that was her name) I had talked to her on several occasions asking her to redo the pool while they were rebuilding the sauna area to make them wheelchair accessible. Her answer to me was "we don't have to". I suggest you read the American with Disabilities Act as that may set you up for a major lawsuit if these things are not accomplished. Now I know there are some local grounds that may hold up but this is a Federal statute that takes precedence over any state or local law. The swimming pool, the sauna, the whirlpool are all not accessible. The post office I can get into but not without banging up the door and possibly harming myself. You have two yellow posts in front of the walkway into the post office boxes. It's at the area where people usually set up a table and sell raffle tickets and meal tickets and things like that. Those posts block easy passage of wheelchairs and the sidewalk leading up to those posts is way too Sm all and I've got stuck there more than once. The dock- it's a great dock- part of it is wheelchair accessible but you got seats literally welded to the dock and that leaves about 4 inches (I didn't measure) and that leaves 4 to 6 inches to get by. I didn't even attempt it. Those seats could easily have been moved back just to allow access what it does is cut off a third of the outer walkway..
Jnsn interrupts and says I think what you're saying is is we need to take a look into our whole facility and we need to go into each of those areas and I think that you're right that is something that we should be aware of and we appreciate you bringing it up because it is something we should be talking about and possibly doing something about.
Owner: If you need my assistance I am ready and willing to help you out. I am not going to demand that you fix every single thing-we don't need to do that to our park. But we need to be safe I spend a lot of money as does everyone else the difference is I am not able to utilize those facilities. Marilyn told me "well, there's a lot of people that don't use that stuff"..
Jnsn interrupts and says I'm sorry we're going to have to limit you to 3 min, let's keep it to three minutes if we possibly can I really appreciate
Owner 6: Look at all the people up here asking questions. We got a great board but we are starting to have communications problems. We used to have workshops and a lot of questions were answered in those workshops. Now, we don't have them and since we can't talk during the meeting when a motion is discussed and passed, please elaborate a little bit more so people know what the board has decided to spend money for.
Secondly, we can have a yard sale in here anytime we want to there's nothing that says we can't. I have yard sales- other people have yard sales at their home on their own property all the time.
Blkbrn interrupts and says I think we were talking about community wide, organized sale
Owner: Yeah I got to go back to the fountain again. How much have we spent on this thing month to date and year to date. Is it is a tremendous amount of money or what's going on? Chap: The initial cost agreed by the board is all that's being spent and they are coming out at their own expense and we are not paying for any of that.
Times I feel when we get up here after the meeting is adjourned and we asked for something or discuss something it falls on deaf ears. I asked last meeting for the board to take under consideration and talked with three board members afterwards. I have not heard anything. I asked that we be allowed to pay our quarterly assessments monthly. It hurts nobody and once it's set up it's done. I didn't hear a word mentioned about it.
Jnsn interrupts: You mean you talked to two or three people but not at the microphone?
Owner: I talked about it at the last meeting and requested that the board take it under consideration.
Toneesha answers: You know the assessments are collected in advance and not collected in arrears. There is already one or two people what they do is they make the initial quarterly payment and they pay monthly thereafter so we need to understand if you are talking about in arrears or in advance. It would need approval of the board so to be clear are you saying that you would pay one quarter in advance and then pay monthly thereafter? Owner answers yes. Toneesha says now that she understands the question she will advise the board and will have an answer next month.
Owner: OK I'll get going
One more thing I'll ask of Chap: Chap I asked you about a month ago about a problem I'm having with the lot next to my house where we have all the steppingstones. Golf carts are in there running around and they break edges off the pavers. It takes very little time to put up for five poles with some chains.
Chap: he already talked to Jhn about that ...
Owner interrupts and said he asked Jhn yesterday and he knew nothing about it and doesn't have a work order on. The tree that was taken off the lot next to my house will that stump be removed?
Chap said he would have to look into that. I already had an issue with that tree I had it taken down because it was such an issue in the past with maintenance and issues that you brought out that have been addressed before so I had it taken down. I should not have done that. I should've talked to the board more. So yeah, I will talk to the board and follow up on that and get an answer for you there's two ways to word that it was either taken down or drastically proved which ever you want to say
Owner 7: All the shrubbery in this resort was paid for by the Garden Club now that we don't have a Garden Club and I don't have money. the resort should pay for all the overcoating needed to keep it in top shape because there's a lot of money there. I don't think our people can do it. I did mine at my house and it does not shine like it should and it needs to be protected and if you have -----people do it that should last for 2 to 3 years so I think we're wasting our money by our people doing it.
Owner 8: I got one question and you can either answer or tell me to go to hell. How much money did it cost when these three ladies sued us and now our insurance is going way up there? How much did this cost us?
Suthrd replies the settlement from the mediation the insurance company paid we did not pay we got a lot of legal fees but I can't give you a figure of the top of my head on the legal fees that would be the expense that it cost the resort. The second part of that of that cost is in this coming budget it's going to cost us a huge amount for an increase in insurance. We were declined by by the company that has carried us before. We had to look and look and look and finally found Insurance coverage.
One of the things that's involved with the new carrier is $75,000 deductible if we are sued and if that happens, the only way that could be paid is by special assessment. It's ridiculous the insurance company did not pay S u e Tg anything they paid the attorney fees they paid $1200 and some dollars to the ladies on 66 silversides for attorneys fees that they paid to a lawyer other than Frd O'N eel (Attny). That's all that was spent. The resort did not spend money on that but the legal fees we spent a lot on and will spend a lot more.
Owner 9: The back wall of the recreation H all: I think that encroaches on the south part of the--- is there something that we need to know? What's going to happen with the shuffleboard club roomwhere all the discs and bats are kept? What's going to happen to that wall?
Jnsn: Yes it's my understanding that they are working from the inside out initially they are going to deal with the counters from the washrooms out but that was never considered. We were never aware of the issues that that wall is an extension of the shuffleboard office.
Owner: If they're going to tear it down we need to make some plans.
Jnsn: There's no plans to tear down at this point there's no plans to tear down anything.
Owner: The second part is to Blingz. I remember at the meeting hearing that you were going to repair the courts that we have now. Is there something I missed?
Blingz: That was something we discussed-- two or three of us at a time of course-- about what can we do. We certainly can't come up with $150,000 we don't have that. While we can't replace and do you what we'd like to do, we can at least make it playable for the time it takes to accumulate the money.
Owner: I think that five years ago we spent $8000 on it trying to fix one court and the next year it was just as bad or worse because it was cracked and you can't fix the cracks. All you can do is look at the paving job we have in the streets-- the cracks we had before are back now. If we just mask over the top, we are just throwing money away-a temporary bandage solution.
Blingz: The cracks might not affect the play that much but I guess that's what we were thinking that something very temporary could be done to make it work for the short term.
Owner: In the last five years they've had three or four holes underneath the courts from the existing drainage ditch that wasn't glued together in the first place and now big holes are underneath and sunk down the courts
Blingz says that it's like wanting a car you want the shiny brand-new one but you can't afford it so all you can buy as a starter and a carburator; you can only fix to get it through day by day year-by-year until you can go out and get that new car.
Owner: In my opinion the board is just throwing money away if it starts plugging $10,000 a year ...
Blingz interrupts: No one intends to put that kind of money into it
Owner: I hope the board will ask the shuffleboard club for some input just like you should ask people who use wheelchairs for advice on wheelchair accessibility
Owner 10: The insurance premium increases by the insurance companies-- I think you can blame a lot of that on the Board of Directors.
<At this point there is extended and maniacal screeching laughter-it was eerie to listen to this on the audio>
Owner: You laugh but you caused frivolous lawsuits and you were told that you couldn't win. You could have dropped it; you could not win and you said We must win! We can't let these people win!" So it's not about using common sense or doing the right thing. You have a "We can't let them win" thinking.
The other thing is the sale/lease agreement with KCNET. That that was all done behind closed doors. There was no open discussion. Not one person in here had a vote on that. We had two people that put the application in to the county; one was the president of the board who had to step down because of conflict of interest because he is involved with Robber berns Stab,who by the way, does not own the company. The company is in his wife's name and Robber berns stab is on the application.
Board: what is the question?
Owner: the question is you're sitting up there pompous. You're a lot of the reason we are having to change insurance companies... Board attempts to cut him off and audience becomes unruly. Board has lost control.
Owner: says NO you're not going to cut me off. We had a line item budget with Kay c Networks and I don't see that on the current financial report anymore. Where did that money go? Stv !!
Toneesha: I do the accounting and I have no idea what you're talking about
Owner: that's the problem. And one more thing: the reason you close the meeting before owners speak is because you don't want it on the official record you don't want anything embarrassing to come out that you don't want on the official record. That's why you only allow comments after the meeting adjourned.
Board President mollies group and attempts to regain control of meeting
Owner 11: Comments on two issues. First the new board website: I noticed some people shaking their heads on the $59.95 amount that was mentioned and they may think that is per a lot but it's not it's just 59.95 a month out of the communication budget. Second I think there's an opportunity for savings here one of the things that came out of the workshop about this was the issue that Tummy said each issue of the S-bag's xpress is costing $700 in printing costs. We certainly recognize that not everyone here is on the Internet but just on that one communication option that we could significantly reduce the number of hardcopies being produced at $700 a month versus the website cost of $60 a month. I think it's a great idea.
listerine: We are in no way trying to do away with paper copies but there are a whole lotta people who don't need paper copies and the savings to be accumulated from that. In any case $60 a month is less than a dollar amount per year so the cost of this website is minuscule. Owner 12: I want to make a comment onboard meetings. I worked for an organization and I've been on volunteer boards and I've never experienced input on issues by spectators during the sequence of the meeting. Having said that, there is an opportunity for more input. I don't understand the decision to have a comments and questions outside of the meeting as opposed to being part of the meeting because once again when I think back, there was an opportunity for discussion as part of the meeting for input from the audience.
Owner 13: It's about the trees every time I turnaround one of our beautiful old trees has been cut down and I'd like to know how you determine when you cut down a tree I see stumps over there by Hrld and two more cutdown up on the trail and all the little baby trees are growing up and we will have more than before you're cutting. You're talking about cutting down a tree to let more light in in the parking lot...
Blkbrn: totally agrees and it pains her when a tree has to come down and she doesn't know what the policy is on the board to cut down trees especially for the people who live here in the summer it makes a big difference in the comfort. As far as the tree that blocks the light, I hope we can reach a decision to trim the tree and keep the tree but if you go there at night it does need some addressing because it has grown a lot and obstructs the light. I think that is why leery did not put that in the motion regarding the lighting because we want to address that issue Owner: Thank you. The other thing is the heckling when other people are talking It's very hurtful. <Silence>
Owner 14: This is a subject I mentioned to Chap. I thought it would be appropriate to bring it up to the board. I believe we need a white stripe going down most of the roads not just around corners not only because it will look aesthetically better but one time we were in the Christmas parade and everybody likes to keep their lights off on their golf carts and one cart in front of me ran off the road because they couldn't see the road. Chap said he would take a look at it from a safety standpoint to when you are on the road at night and a golf cart.
Owner 15: I just want to tell you that my stepping down from the board had absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with Kay c Networks and Jm off is a bald-faced liar.
Leave 'em laughing DBag!
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Nov 20, 2015 14:29:49 GMT -5
The one thing about D, he always gives one a "Good Laugh"..... Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 21, 2015 8:47:36 GMT -5
Treasurer stated at Nov 2015 Board Meeting: A little fact-checking is in order here. There are people that believe everything the board tells them to believe. Here are the checks dispersed after the Feb 2015 mediation from the ATTORNEY's account from the funds reimbursed by the insurance company. These were simply the return of fees to the Complainants. In Addition, the insurance company paid extra fees to Attorney that were not passed along to the Complainants. Attachment Deleted Attachment Deleted Attachment DeletedI thank FoolDay for his question to the Board. It reopens a wound but permits the opportunity to refresh memories, establish factual reality and make a cautionary statement. If we forget this page in our history and do not learn lessons, these kind of problems are apt to be repeated. There are many new owners in S-bag who do not know this history who are voting in the next election. I post these check copies hoping to eliminate any further denial or doubt in owners' minds about how much these lawsuits cost the members due to the Actions taken by the board. These checks result from 2 separate Board decisions and actions. First, the Board refused to remove the invalid Preservation from my lot and, despite 9 months of faux mediation (done and out after 35 minutes) and letters and meetings, the board's continued refusal left me no choice but to pursue my rights through legal channels. Secondly, the Board FILED THE ORIGINAL lawsuit against Tmyk/Astn as a show of force in attempting to demonstrate control over the park through intimidation and the threat of litigation. Tmyk/Astn filed a countersuit as their DEFENSE and the rest is history. The board was well aware that these lawsuits were "unwinnable" but persisted in the belief (probably encouraged by Management Company attorneys) that the "girls" would back down. The "girls" fought for their rights. Both lawsuits settled at mediation. Had the "girls" not agreed to mediation, the justice system and a jury would likely have decimated SLohA in the end with appeals and legal costs reaching several times the mediated expense. There are people who would like to believe that SLohA prevailed. They need to be reminded that attorney fees are returned to the prevailing party--ie Tmyk, Astn and Tg. The Biggest Loser: S-bag owners who: ...paid over $68K for the Board's first-strike vanity lawsuit against Tomakyo/Astn, ...paid thousands of legal dollars fussing with Tg ...paid thousand of legal dollars recording an invalid Preservation against 787 parcels, ...FUTURE PAYMENTS in the form of huge insurance costs and ...practical unavailability of indemnity to directors for wrongdoing for the long term which will have unpleasant implications to future board director candidates. Now, S-bag is virtually uninsurable against future lawsuits and must pay its costs up front--up to $75K--before insurance will kick in. Members must share in the pain, because nobody objected. Owners wanted to believe the board knew what it was doing and they were being told the truth. Members will be footing the bill for the board's behavior and their own naivety for decades. Members should also not be surprised if future lawsuits name INDIVIDUAL directors so that non-board owners will not have to pick up the tab. Accused directors will have to hire their own lawyers and pay their own costs if they legally injure owners and breach fiduciary duties of loyalty and care in conducting the business of SLohA. Owners need to adopt a new attitude of "healthy skepticism" about the activities and motives of their elected leaders. They would be wise to take a second look at who they elect each year, ask specific questions about SLohA finances and consider the advisability of recalling certain directors who put S-bag's AND YOUR PERSONAL financial health at risk!
|
|
|
Post by Witness on Nov 21, 2015 10:10:29 GMT -5
Treasurer stated at Nov 2015 Board Meeting: A little fact-checking is in order here. There are people that believe everything the board tells them to believe. Here are the checks dispersed after the Feb 2015 mediation from the ATTORNEY's account from the funds reimbursed by the insurance company. These were simply the return of fees to the Complainants. In Addition, the insurance company paid extra fees to Attorney that were not passed along to the Complainants. I thank FoolDay for his question to the Board. It reopens a wound but permits the opportunity to refresh memories, establish factual reality and make a cautionary statement. If we forget this page in our history and do not learn lessons, these kind of problems are apt to be repeated. There are many new owners in S-bag who do not know this history who are voting in the next election. I post these check copies hoping to eliminate any further denial or doubt in owners' minds about how much these lawsuits cost the members due to the Actions taken by the board. These checks result from 2 separate Board decisions and actions. First, the Board refused to remove the invalid Preservation from my lot and, despite 9 months of faux mediation (done and out after 35 minutes) and letters and meetings, the board's continued refusal left me no choice but to pursue my rights through legal channels. Secondly, the Board FILED THE ORIGINAL lawsuit against Tmyk/Astn as a show of force in attempting to demonstrate control over the park through intimidation and the threat of litigation. Tmyk/Astn filed a countersuit as their DEFENSE and the rest is history. The board was well aware that these lawsuits were "unwinnable" but persisted in the belief (probably encouraged by Management Company attorneys) that the "girls" would back down. The "girls" fought for their rights. Both lawsuits settled at mediation. Had the "girls" not agreed to mediation, the justice system and a jury would likely have decimated SLohA in the end with appeals and legal costs reaching several times the mediated expense. There are people who would like to believe that SLohA prevailed. They need to be reminded that attorney fees are returned to the prevailing party--ie Tmyk, Astn and Tg. The Biggest Loser: S-bag owners who: ...paid over $68K for the Board's first-strike vanity lawsuit against Tomakyo/Astn, ...paid thousands of legal dollars fussing with Tg ...paid thousand of legal dollars recording an invalid Preservation against 787 parcels, ...FUTURE PAYMENTS in the form of huge insurance costs and ...practical unavailability of indemnity to directors for wrongdoing for the long term which will have unpleasant implications to future board director candidates. Now, S-bag is virtually uninsurable against future lawsuits and must pay its costs up front--up to $75K--before insurance will kick in. Members must share in the pain, because nobody objected. Owners wanted to believe the board knew what it was doing and they were being told the truth. Members will be footing the bill for the board's behavior and their own naivety for decades. Members should also not be surprised if future lawsuits name INDIVIDUAL directors so that non-board owners will not have to pick up the tab. Accused directors will have to hire their own lawyers and pay their own costs if they legally injure owners and breach fiduciary duties of loyalty and care in conducting the business of SLohA. Owners need to adopt a new attitude of "healthy skepticism" about the activities and motives of their elected leaders. They would be wise to take a second look at who they elect each year, ask specific questions about SLohA finances and consider the advisability of recalling certain directors who put S-bag's AND YOUR PERSONAL financial health at risk! This is the most accurate summary written so far of the fiasco the BOD put this park through let alone the girls at 66 Silversides. We should all hold the BOD accountable for this and other maneuvers they have proceeded with without the owners' permission.
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Nov 21, 2015 11:25:35 GMT -5
The November Meeting, when I pointed out the main reason for the Insurance Premium Increase and $75,000 deductible was because of the male Board Members attitude of we can not let these ladies Win, not about using common sense and doing the right thing. What did the they do on the St age? They Laughed like Fools, well this is no Laughing Matter.
"The Worst Board ever in SLohA"!
|
|
Annonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Annonymous Environmentalist on Nov 24, 2015 9:38:38 GMT -5
Members should also not be surprised if future lawsuits name INDIVIDUAL directors so that non-board owners will not have to pick up the tab. Accused directors will have to hire their own lawyers and pay their own costs if they legally injure owners and breach fiduciary duties of loyalty and care in conducting the business of SLohA. Owners need to adopt a new attitude of "healthy skepticism" about the activities and motives of their elected leaders. They would be wise to take a second look at who they elect each year, ask specific questions about SLohA finances and consider the advisability of recalling certain directors who put S-bag's AND YOUR PERSONAL financial health at risk! This is the most accurate summary written so far of the fiasco the BOD put this park through let alone the girls at 66 Silversides. We should all hold the BOD accountable for this and other maneuvers they have proceeded with without the owners' permission. They should have NO indemnity when ONLY they make downright asinine decisions ONLY amongst board members and management company attorneys in order to foolishly go after ONLY certain owners, not ONLY with the rest of us owners' monies, but WITHOUT the rest of us owners' permissions to do so. I cannot understand why our insurance company allowed this to go on in the first place, knowing full well that going against 66SS was unwinnable. And, where was the communication to owners on these legal matters so the rest of us owners be informed? Of course, these individual board members should be the ONLY ones held accountable for their ridiculously wreck-less and unwinnable legal actions against ONLY certain owners in SLohA, especially in the light of the fact that there has been no openness, no communications, and certainly no forthright information reaching the rest of us SLohA owners in here from our board regarding legal matters they themselves got the rest of us into. And, that has got to change. But, how?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 24, 2015 12:40:41 GMT -5
Anonymous Environmentalist posted: I wish I knew the answer to that question...but I know how NOT to answer the question. The Answer is NOT to be found in posts by one board member who is obviously negatively disposed toward owner participation, as evidenced by this gem posted at the Post Office today: Attachment Deleted Here is the text of Stv Suthrd's comments about this article on speaking at board meetings: Attachment DeletedThis was not posted on CHUG.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 24, 2015 13:03:26 GMT -5
Anonymous Environmentalist posted: I wish I knew the answer to that question...but I know how NOT to answer the question. The Answer is NOT to be found in posts by one board member who is obviously negatively disposed toward owner participation, as evidenced by this gem posted at the Post Office today: View Attachment View Attachment Here is the text of Stv Suthrd's comments about this article on speaking at board meetings: This was not posted on CHUG.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 24, 2015 13:19:33 GMT -5
As a read with some shock Stv Suthrd's comments, I was reminded of high school Civics class where various forms of governments were described. It occurred to me that "SLohA is a corporation run by an oligarchy". So I googled the term and..BINGO!
Look at the similarities in the definition:
Oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía); from ὀλίγος (olígos), meaning "few", and ἄρχω (arkho), meaning "to rule or to command")
...is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a Sm all number of people. (9 to be exact if you don't count Management Company's gang of attorneys)
...These people could be distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, education, corporate, religious or military control (or perhaps inflated egos and special interests in private business ventures)
...Such states are often controlled by a few prominent families who typically pass their influence from one generation to the next (In SLR, this is called "planned board seat vacancies and focused appointments of crony successors)
...but inheritance is not a necessary condition for the application of this term.
Throughout history, oligarchies have often been tyrannical, relying on public obedience or oppression to exist. In SLR, this is called "lawsuits" to show people that dissent will not be tolerated, denial of participation, secret, closed-door communication and punitive, organized and systematic social ostracism from the larger group.
Isn't it amazing how closely SLohA resembles an oligarchy?
|
|
Annonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Annonymous Environmentalist on Nov 25, 2015 9:16:30 GMT -5
If our board meetings are "not member meetings" as Mr. Southerd says, my next question is this: How come we can't have regular "member meetings then?" It appears that that is exactly what we need--if us owners are not allowed to speak at these "board meetings," then, we should just have our own--and if the board members want to attend, they will be allowed in, but not be allowed to speak--since this would be a "member meeting."
|
|