|
Post by Admin on Jul 25, 2019 10:06:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jimherbst on Jul 25, 2019 10:24:43 GMT -5
Regarding his statement on internet service,I find it both interesting and frustrating that our president made no effort to correct the erroneous statement he previously made about Spectrum's "seasonal mode" policy. He doesn't need to take my research at face value but, at the very least, he should contact Spectrum himself to "get the skinny". I plan on forwarding his President's Message the Spectrum sales person I spoke with at length. Maybe she is interested in finding out why she submitted a written offer months ago which fully explains the Community Solutions option, but she has yet to receive any acknowledgement from our Board, either yes or no. Instead, our president continues to misrepresent the facts. Considering the huge capital investment Spectrum is making, maybe Spectrum's attorney's might also be interested.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 26, 2019 21:26:43 GMT -5
I think leery is "phoning it in". He refuses to attend to my records request and schlepps it off to "ask the resort" (his actual words!) and then begs off that "the resort has been busy" and his management people are absent from SLohA business. Despite all that, I agreed to wait awhile until things calmed down, but after another two weeks---nothing from leery....
But worse than that is my suspicion that you are right, Jm, and that leery is "protecting" TRS and perhaps other investors in KCNet from business intrusion by Spectrum. After all, he has already given away the farm with the free use of SLohA property for 3 years and no tower income for owners. He has gone back on this promise that business would not be conducted from the park.
And deliberately withheld the "offer" information on community rates from owners. At the very least, that is a dereliction of duty.
At this point, I do not believe that a signed contract exists at all.
If leery IS protecting 3rd party interests, it is an affront to the owners who elected him to represent their interests.
|
|
|
Post by Shmoopy on Aug 7, 2019 14:29:51 GMT -5
For one think having a Canadian President of the Board seems like a real conflict of interest. >Canadians don't give a hoot about American's Constitutional Rights, they (Canadians) only want Americans to provide cheap/free internet and phone FOR them. They don't want to afford the cost of transferring their services from Canada or getting roped into a 2 year contract say like with Sprint or any other bundle of services provider.
There are USA based providers that are in the business of supplying theses services, you should honor the Americans by paying like we Americans do. We don't expect Canadians to give us a cheap/free ride in their Country just because it costs us extra $ or requires a minimum contract.
|
|
|
2019 July
Aug 8, 2019 21:12:47 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by leeryfine on Aug 8, 2019 21:12:47 GMT -5
I couldn't disagree with you more. Without our Canadian residents we would have a very vacant park, less participation and less leadership. If you don't agree with the decisions, then be the first in line to run for the position or attend the board meeting and voice your opinion on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 9, 2019 10:05:34 GMT -5
I couldn't disagree with you more. It has been shown/proven that when the "outsiders" attempt to run for office, they are blocked in various ways by board and management actions. Only the "in clique" gets appointed and maneuvered into holding a director position. The Management company is very invested in maintaining status quo and control over the board.
To say we would have nothing of your perceived value ie no "participation/leadership/vacancy" in S-bag if the Canadians were not there is as bad as saying that Canadians wield too much influence and do not respect our country/culture. Both opinions diminish and do not contribute productively.
|
|
|
Post by shmoopy on Aug 9, 2019 10:06:17 GMT -5
so are you saying the only reason Canadians are in SLR is because of you? Not my first rodeo with the "board" you will NEVER get honest people in those positions and expose what really goes on.
|
|
|
Post by shmoopy on Aug 9, 2019 10:44:05 GMT -5
leery, try reading my first comment again, and then answer it honestly w/out side stepping the points that I made. Try giving us other owners the truth about contracts and costs and lease agreements on paper with BOD signatures. Try keeping it real without the double talk that we all are so used to getting that has nothing to do with the actual purpose of a secret company and also not showing any revenue from our tower contracts or who occupies them.
Please show us the signed lease agreement (that has been asked for over and over) and signed by the BOD & all parties like Spectrum and all others involved.
I never said no Canadians in the park, i said conflict of interest to have them on the BOD.
|
|
|
Post by jimherbst on Aug 10, 2019 18:29:00 GMT -5
The issue is not whether the Saddlebaggers from Canada have some hidden agenda to benefit themselves at the expense of the rest of us. Rather, the issue is whether certain members of the Board –past and present – are observing their fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of the Association as a whole. Back in March when representatives from Verizon held a demonstration on the “Verizon Jetpack” on our community room, a former president of the Board took it upon himself to grab the microphone and start a rant about being falsely accused of having a financial interest in KCNET. He vehemently denied this, saying that he was simply a “close friend of Bb stab”. The question that immediately went through my mind was “did your friendship with stab color your decisions as a Board member, to the financial detriment of Association members?”. If so - as one of our Saddlebaggers (and a retired attorney) pointed out - Board members who fail to exercise reasonable caution in carrying out their fiduciary duty can be held personally liable for resulting financial damages to Association members. The decision by the Board to give KCNET exclusive use of our communication towers (at $0 rent) left Saddlebaggers with little choice when it came to internet service. If that weren’t enough, there was even an attempt by some Board members, back in 2014, to include the cost of KCNET’s service in our HOA dues. Recently KCNET made a change in its billing policy whereby its customers were required to pay in-advance for the entire winter season. As a result KCNET owes at least two months of refunds to its customers. By my estimate, the total amount of refunds KCNET owes to its customers is between $50,000 and $150,000. One way that loss could have been mitigated is to have required KCNET to post a surety bond to guaranty its performance under the terms of the tower lease agreement. That is a common practice for any long term service contract. A couple of months ago, leery listerine, the current S-bag president, initiated an email discussion with me in response to my past criticism of the Board’s actions regarding KCNET. During that exchange, I made a number of constructive suggestions regarding what the Board could do, with respect to the new tower lease with TRS in order to avoid the problems we had with KCNET. Among those suggestions was a requirement that TRS post a surety bond to guaranty performance, as well as to cover any damages to our towers caused by TRS. That suggestion was precipitated by Mr. listerine’s statement to me that TRS has to make extensive repairs to the towers. Considering that the Towers were inspected by the County Building Inspector less than two years ago in conjunction with our building/zoning permit application, one can deduce that those “damages” were caused by KCNET’s removal of its equipment from our towers after KCNET went defunct this spring. My other suggestion was in response to Mr. listerine’s justification to me for the Board’s decision not to charge TRS any rent for its 3 year lease of our towers. According to listerine, TRS expects to make little to no profit during initial St ages of its operations. Having once been in charge of a Sm all business loan program for the City of West Allis, Wisconsin, I understand that it often takes a year or two before a new business begins to make a profit. On the other hand, once TRS does begin to realize a profit, the Association should get a share of that profit as compensation for leasing our towers. I suggested, therefore, that our lease with TRS include a “percentage rent”. Percentage leases are commonly used in retail mall settings, whereby the mall owner receives a portion of the lessee’s annual revenue as rent. The lessee’s income can be verified by the requiring the lessee to provide a certified copy of the lessee’s Schedule C to his/her federal tax return. In response to my suggestions, all I got back from listerine was something the Board may want to pursue when the tower lease with TRS comes up for renewal 3 years from now. I regard that response as totally unsatisfactory and not in the best interest of the Association. There is one final point I’d like to make with respect to our tower lease with TRS. I have attempted to research Mr. Scheerer’s past business background, but could find nothing to indicate he has any experience with operating a wireless internet service. So how does he plan on running TRS – especially since Scheerer is a snowbird from the Toronto area? Could it be that TRS is, in reality, a front for the owners of the now defunct KCNET? Will Scheerer be “hiring” stab to run the internet servers in Scheerer’s absence? leery listerine insists that is not the case, and that – contrary to what Bb stab publicly stated during a community meeting last April – TRS did not purchase any of KCNET’s equipment. So, how does Mr. listerine know that for certain?
|
|