Architectural Review Committee--A few notes

The bod has chosen to use our money to S u e the ladies at 66 Silversides. I do not want them to waste our money that way or for the carport. What is wrong with you men and Alc; it is prima facia that 1. the manbod has "selectively" enforced the mis-represented covenents, 2. Has allowed another illegitimate doublewide in the park with C. Jenson's on the horizon. They are not being sued.  There is a preponderence of evidence on the ladies behave.  The manbod is wasting up to $20,000. just to begin suit in legal fees and, ultimately has an irrelevant suit and will be adding lawyers fees on behalf of the ladies. Way to go, manbod, how fiscally irresponsible can you be?

Heres a juicy rumor floating around

Word has it ,that the manager has two sugar daddies in here.I know one of them

Becareful guys,She will bleed you dry

Ask her exhusbands...rumored at four

That Voluntary association is getting closer Vass

Its only a matter of time as more folk realize,Its time to throw out this management company and change board members

pestcontrol posted:

Chap chose to soothe Rooffled feathers in his KK Manager's report this morning.  He has been cutting down trees with a vengance since he replaced the last sociopathic manager with his 5-day old CAM license and started leaning the ropes, while at the same time, making bad decisions.  He 'splained that the trees had to come down and he wasn't the only one who said so--and he AGONIZED about this decision!  Well that may or may not be true.  (Who paid to have the trees cut down and removed?  Is the internet signal improved?)  This was a site concern and only the owner and the contractor should have been involved.  Chap is gonna cost SLohA a boatload of money one of these days.

Apart from arbitrary treatment and elitist favoritism by MANBOD, neither the board nor Chap has the authority to "make a variance".  Finally, even the board itself admitted that in 2014. 

Why: a variance is a deviance from an architectural/construction rule or preferred standard.  And there are no architectural/construction standards. 
Why:  it is unnecessary since there is no architectural authority delegated by Covenant to any board or committee. 
Why:  because S-bag was developed as a campground and permanent structures were specifically not permitted.

D-Bag has no authority to Grnt anyone any permission for anything!

Saddlebaggers have a regrettable history of being too timid and scared to hiccup in pubic without permission.  But, at least back then there were rules were in effect. Now, there are NO RULES and this group persists in abusing owners and feeding the lawyers with dollars paid by the the abused for the pursuit of persecution in the name of *TinKirbell Rules and Group Paranoia.

As far back as 1980, the Bag was embroiled in an ugly collective paranoia about owners running amok unless they were suppressed into submission by bullies making mo' rules.   Several lawsuits against owners were launched over clotheslines, sloped roofs over trailers and screened-in porches.  SLohA lost nearly all of these disputes and flushed thousands of owner assessment dollars down the toilet.  Did it learn anything from that?

Perhaps this madness will correct itself naturally over time as demographics change and the fear of rampant clothesline anarchy recedes.  Here is the September 1980 Ledger article referred to:
sadruleseldgerarticle.docx (478.64 KB)Attachment Deleted

S-bag in Turmoil over Rules

It is interesting to also note that the Board was forcing material alterations of common property and corresponding assessment charges--without the consent of Owners--even back in 1980.  Just like they are doing now with stab's internet towers:

Quote:  "Last year they assessed residents $107 each for a new clubhouse.  He said directors decided to build a clubhouse without taking a vote...although they did conduct an opinion poll..."

Back then, these people were using the same social punitive smear tactics as today:
 
Quote from Clothesline Criminal:  "People that used to be my friends don't even talk to me anymore" she said.  "They say I'm a troublemaker".

*TinKirbell Rules is an example of the psychological concept of TinKirbell Effect i.e. "Sometimes what we think determines what we see."  It comes from the Disney classic where the audience is told to clap for a dying TinKirbell and she miraculously comes to life.  It is wishful thinking that gets in the way of reality and smart decision-making as policy makers who believe something to be true (like the presence of weapons of mass destruction) start acting like they have evidence to prove it true (e.g. D-Bag and his doctored up 1986 Amendment).  Closely associated with faith-based decision-making and "in your dreams" thinking.  

A TinKirbell Defense was actually used by an HOA's lawyers in a recent Orlando case.  After the laughter receded, the HOA lost and was $175K poorer...