|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 4, 2013 5:39:46 GMT -5
From CHUG
Announcement Date: 12/03/2013 Seq: 1
ATTENTION OWNERS..
THERE WILL BE AN INFORMATIONAL FORUM CONCERNING THE PROPOSED RESORT-WIDE INTERNET ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2013
FROM 9:00 A.M. -- 11:00 A.M.
IN THE CLUBHOUSE.
KCNetworks WILL BE DISTRIBUTING DETAILED INFORMATION REGARDING THE PROPOSAL TO THE ASSOCIATION
AND FEES ASSOCIATED WITH INSTALLATION AND TIMELINE IN REGARDS TO THE SLohA BUDGET.
THEY WILL ALSO HAVE A Q & A SESSION. PLEASE CONSIDER ATTENDING IN ORDER TO GET ACCURATE INFORMATION SHOULD THE ITEM BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT.
THANK YOU AND HOPE TO SEE YOU THERE!
|
|
|
|
Post by Santa's Baby on Dec 5, 2013 7:08:37 GMT -5
Dear Santa
I hear you are delivering a special bag 'o surprises to SLohA this Christmas! Your elves have told us about the big gift you have in store for the owners.
Santa, do you recall that owners were asked 2 years ago if they wanted parkwide internet added into their assessments and, even though the first year cost was being absorbed by a fee surplus, owners said "NO"?
Now-for a second time, owners are being lobbied by the private business owner (sponsored by MANBOD) and, with the help of MANBOD and member(s) of the board with undisclosed interest in the business, are being asked (and possibly demanded), via their assessments, to pay for hardware and non-essential internet services to the tune of an additional $180/yr.
This service will be provided by a private corporation that has situated its business equipment on our common property without consultation with owners and in violation of our Covenants.
Not only is the siting of privately-owned towers and auxillary equipment on common property a major breach of covenants, we are told (twice) that there exists NO formal written agreements of any kind between the business owner and SLohA.
Santa--most owners' homes in here are valued in the low 30's and the owners are retirees on fixed incomes. Most owners only vacation here for a few months or rent their cottages out for the season. But, they are being asked (possibly demanded!) to pay an additional $180/year plus $125 for equipment to be installed on their home that they may not want or use.
Further, owners have been paying to build the foundations of the transmission towers and antennas and to insure the owner's towers using owner funds!
And, if owners do not support the ballot item and fail it a second time, MANBOD still has the authority to force owners to accept the gift and levy owners to pay it bundled into their assessments.
Santa, if owners do not pay, MANBOD will place a lien and foreclose their property.
Is that accurate, Santa? If yes, that's not what I call a gift.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Budget on Dec 5, 2013 7:31:42 GMT -5
Is this internet proposal based on the budget passing ? Or will they be 2 separate votes ?
Am I seeing this correctly , If the Budget passes then we have voted to increase our FEE $100. 00
And if the Internet passes then we vote to increase out FEE an ADDITIONAL $280.00
lets do the math....
Budget increase $100.
Internet Extortion Fee $180.00
----------
NEW INCREASE = $280.00
People would have to be stupid to vote for either
Why vote to cut your own financial throat ?
VOTE NO ON THE BUDGET & INTERNET EXTORTION FEE
|
|
Low Budget correction
Guest
|
Post by Low Budget correction on Dec 5, 2013 7:35:15 GMT -5
Is this internet proposal based on the budget passing ? Or will they be 2 separate votes ? Am I seeing this correctly , If the Budget passes then we have voted to increase our FEE $100. 00 And if the Internet passes then we vote to increase our FEE an ADDITIONAL $180.00 lets do the math.... Budget increase $100. Internet Extortion Fee $180.00 ---------- NEW INCREASE = $280.00 People would have to be stupid to vote for either Why vote to cut your own financial throat ? VOTE NO ON THE BUDGET & INTERNET EXTORTION FEE |
|
|
|
Post by BagLady on Dec 5, 2013 8:40:50 GMT -5
The budget ratification should be a separate item but I do not know if it must be a separate item. Passing a budget should not hinge on the internet question because the risk is too great of failing to ratify the budget due to contamination from the emotion-charged internet issue.
However, owners will eventually be permitted to see the budget and ballot some unspecified time ahead of voting and depending on that, will look into that further. If there is not sufficient time to gather the information to make an informed vote, owners should simply vote NO.
I do not know how the fee can be legally added AFTER a budget is approved. It is possible that the first year's $$ might be absorbed by some mechanism/agreement already in place. Perhaps that is why the ballot was done that way two years ago ie as "prepaid" from the budget surplus for the first year.
Too much MANBOD smoke 'n mirrors going on lately. What happened to my peaceful, carefree retirement?
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Dec 5, 2013 9:30:12 GMT -5
What is policy if the Budget FAILS to pass ?
Does the BOD just adjust a few things and call it "good" or must they start over and provide a new Budget for approval by a 2nd Vote ?
Or do things remain as they are with the current Budget ?
Its difficult to trust the honesty and accuracy of this present MANBOD group is the reason I asked these questions here .
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 5, 2013 11:32:34 GMT -5
From the Bylaws
The sequence is:
1. MANBOD makes up a new budget for Operating and Reserve Accounts
2. MANBOD mails members a copy of BOTH the proposed budget and the ballot materials before the combined Budget Audit Meeting/Town H all Meeting (scheduled for Dec 11). It is anyone's guess if or how the Internet Fee will be incorporated into the proposed budget.
3. Any adjustment to the Budget is discussed and agreed adjustments are made at the Town H all Meeting.
4. MANBOD resubmits the amended proposed budget (and any ballot matters) and mails a copy to each member
5. The Owners are then supposed to vote on the Budget and any other ballot matters at the Annual Owner's Meeting. (This little detail is ignored by MANBOD)
Because the Bylaws are not followed and the ballots are counted on the day before the Annual Owner's Meeting, the meeting's purpose is just to announce the results, seat the new board and have BOD elect their officers.
If MANBOD were following Bylaws, the voting to ratify the proposed budget and any other ballot matters would take place at the Annual meeting in February or---if there is further concern about ballot or budget matters--at a special meeting of members to be called (by either members with a petition or by MANBOD).
In practice, all input and conversation is over by December 11 and the only remaining voice available to Owners is to vote Yes or No. I have not found out yet what the procedure is if the Budget is not ratified. Workin' on it.
Any owner can, within 60 days of the election, file a complaint cH allenging the election with State who will then arbitrate the complaint internally.
|
|
Anonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Anonymous Environmentalist on Dec 5, 2013 11:34:52 GMT -5
This internet proposal is nothing more than their DISTORTION of the EXTORTION of a PORTION of residents' FORTUNES.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 5, 2013 11:41:52 GMT -5
Oh Environmentalist! I am so impressed by that creative use of slant rhyming!
|
|
Anonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Anonymous Environmentalist on Dec 5, 2013 11:45:57 GMT -5
thank you!
|
|
Anonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Anonymous Environmentalist on Dec 5, 2013 11:49:31 GMT -5
we're going to the mtg. on the 10th--time to shake things up a bit, or a lot...
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 5, 2013 16:59:02 GMT -5
The landscape seems a bit murky with regard to "What happens if the Budget fails to be ratified?"
The best answer I found was authored by an attorney in another state:
This certainly makes a lot of sense.
Since our docs were set up prior to 1992, the answer to the question "should" be found in our governing docs. However, I did not find it. The post-1992 HOA is governed by state law.
I am going to post the question on the hoatalk.com forum which is monitored by past presidents and see if anyone knows.
The above is provided for informational and educational purposes and should not be used as a basis to guide actions. You should consult with an attorney for legal advice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Poor Guest's Guest on Dec 9, 2013 13:03:26 GMT -5
The budget ratification should be a separate item but I do not know if it must be a separate item. Passing a budget should not hinge on the internet question because the risk is too great of failing to ratify the budget due to contamination from the emotion-charged internet issue. However, owners will eventually be permitted to see the budget and ballot some unspecified time ahead of voting and depending on that, will look into that further. If there is not sufficient time to gather the information to make an informed vote, owners should simply vote NO. I do not know how the fee can be legally added AFTER a budget is approved. It is possible that the first year's $$ might be absorbed by some mechanism/agreement already in place. Perhaps that is why the ballot was done that way two years ago ie as "prepaid" from the budget surplus for the first year. Too much MANBOD smoke 'n mirrors going on lately. What happened to my peaceful, carefree retirement? Only the few rich people in here will enjoy a peaceful, carefree retirement; the rest of us on extremely limited incomes are going to have to find another place to live--like a cardboard box! |
|
|
|
Post by Obama-Net Plan on Dec 10, 2013 7:27:28 GMT -5
Here's an idea--the "ObamaNet Plan!"
"If you like the internet plan you already have--you can keep it!"
|
|
|
|
Post by BagLady on Dec 10, 2013 20:12:59 GMT -5
I have not yet listened to the entire recording of today's meeting but I got the gist of it.
It is sad that there is NO provision at all in the proposal to accommodate hardship for any reason. The observation when this was brought up by a member was that it is just "Too bad".
I am so shocked and disappointed at the greediness that has taken control in SLR since the arrival of "professional management". The leaders have no sense of loyalty, compassion or community--and people silently agree. Do they have no sense of moral outrage?
It is not the community I thought I had bought into.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Jun 22, 2015 20:58:24 GMT -5
Our current leaders keep saying that a few people are trying to change SLR, and they are radicals, & they tell lies. I think some of our BODs, need to look at a Mirror, and you will see the real problem.
The majority of S-bag residents for the second time have "Voted No" on mandatory Resort wide Internet service. "No Means No"
"So Live & Let Live"
|
|
